Realistic UFAs that Pats should consider

David Carr , are you serious?

Re: Realistic UFA PATS should consider

KontradictioN said:

Well, considering that we operate in a system that is purely RBBC, Parker would just be another part of that attack. Personally, I would sign him, cut Taylor, re-sign Faulk, and (of course) keep Maroney and Morris. That would be a pretty good rotation at RB.

As for T.O., no thanks. I would have thought that Pats fans have seen enough locker room dissention in 2009. I guess not. His talent isn't worth it.

Click to expand...

Parker doesn't willingly run inside the tackles anymore is, I believe, the gripe, along with the injury issues.

Re: Realistic UFA PATS should consider

BradyFTW! said:

If it's not the point, then why did you bring it up and then reiterate it when I called you out on it in the first place? It's suddenly not the point once you realize that you can't back it up, since you were talking out of your ass all along?

And really? There should never be a reason? Like, not even in the event that profits are shrinking, with a looming work stoppage only one year on the horizon? Yeah, it's easy to shrug off the prospect of operating at a loss of millions of dollars when it's not your money, isn't it? Rational people, OTOH, with even a basic understanding of the principles involved, recognize that the organization does have a budget to work with. It's tied to its revenues and operating costs. This is a function of reality and basic business. If you think that it's Kraft's civic duty to subsidize the Patriots with his other business entities, then you're just being dumb. He won't do that, and he shouldn't.

Click to expand...

I honestly didn't want to hijack the topic because our argument has nothing to do with the subject. If you want e-mail me about it and we can discuss it. My email is in my profile.

And there should NEVER be a reason the Pats shouldn't go after the top players. Your argument makes no sense because the owners are still going to receive ALL of their revenue sharing through the TV deal, which is millions of dollars whether the players strike or not. Therefore there are no shrinking profits. The TV networks still pay the same amount whether this is a work stopage or not. The Pats will not be operating a loss and will be making huge amounts of money whether they players strike or not. It is in the contract between the networks and the NFL. I will find the article from PFT if I need to, but I'm pretty sure most members have read about it.

The Krafts will never have to subsidize the franchise with other business entities and they never will. It's not about people's rationale because from every reported football source there are only a handful of teams not making profits. I am reasonably assure that the Patriots are not one of those teams. The operating budget is probably tied to revenues. My only complaint is that from all sources the revenue sharing generously covers players salaries. The Patriots are making money! Why isn't the budget for player's salaries increasing an uncapped year knowing that revenue sharing will exist whether there is a strike or not?

Brian Hoyer is a completely unproven QB...David Carr is an excellent B/U QB

ramon said:

Brian Hoyer is a completely unproven QB...David Carr is an excellent B/U QB

Click to expand...

All David Carr is good for is, holding the ball and taking sacks. Based on that criteria, I don't want him holding the clipboard.

ramon said:

Brian Hoyer is a completely unproven QB...David Carr is an excellent B/U QB

Click to expand...

He's so unproven that Belichick felt they needed to bring in a veteran QB this past season... OH WAIT..

ramon said:

Brian Hoyer is a completely unproven QB...David Carr is an excellent B/U QB

Click to expand...

In the past, I would have said "what are you smoking? I'd like some of that." But now whatever it is that you're smoking that led you to make this bizarre statement is probably fatal, so I decline.

i don't care who is backing up brady cause if brady gets hurt. it's season over any ways so im good with Hoyer, as the back up

patsfan-1982 said:

i don't care who is backing up brady cause if brady gets hurt. it's season over any ways so im good with Hoyer, as the back up

Click to expand...

Yeah. The season was SO over in 2008.

KontradictioN said:

Yeah. The season was SO over in 2008.

Click to expand...

yes matt won 11 games. but he did it with a 16-0 team. matt would not have won more then 8 games with the 2009 pats.



and even if they do make the playoffs we all know they are not winning a SB with out brady,

patsfan-1982 said:

yes matt won 11 games. but he did it with a 16-0 team. matt would not have won more then 8 games with the 2009 pats.



and even if they do make the playoffs we all know they are not winning a SB with out brady,

Click to expand...

This is just bad logic. Cassel still had to deliver the passes, and did so after a little while. That team would have been 5-11 without a capable back-up. As for your second statement, I'd venture to guess that there were those out there who thought that the Pats wouldn't sniff the postseason had Bledsoe gone down before 2001.

KontradictioN said:

This is just bad logic. Cassel still had to deliver the passes, and did so after a little while. That team would have been 5-11 without a capable back-up. As for your second statement, I'd venture to guess that there were those out there who thought that the Pats wouldn't sniff the postseason had Bledsoe gone down before 2001.

Click to expand...

That analogy only holds if you think that Bledsoe in 2001 was anywhere near the level of QB that Brady is now.

BradyFTW! said:

That analogy only holds if you think that Bledsoe in 2001 was anywhere near the level of QB that Brady is now.

Click to expand...

Not really, the way Bledsoe was looked at (and the way our back-ups were looked at) back then. You forget that Bledsoe had just sign a then-record deal. There was a reason for that.

KontradictioN said:

This is just bad logic. Cassel still had to deliver the passes, and did so after a little while. That team would have been 5-11 without a capable back-up. As for your second statement, I'd venture to guess that there were those out there who thought that the Pats wouldn't sniff the postseason had Bledsoe gone down before 2001.

Click to expand...

your right i was one of the guys that did not think brady could beat the rams. but i was worng.

KontradictioN said:

Not really, the way Bledsoe was looked at (and the way our back-ups were looked at) back then. You forget that Bledsoe had just sign a then-record deal. There was a reason for that.

Click to expand...

I didn't forget that; it's just irrelevant to the real issue. The reason that he got that contract was because the previous regime that ran the Pats wasn't very good. You think Belichick would have given him that contract? I certainly didn't think that Bledsoe was an excellent QB at the time, and I don't know many people who did. And even if that had been the perception, it still wouldn't matter. The fact is that at no time in his career was Bledsoe even half as good as QB as Brady is. And this is coming from a guy who thinks that he's underrated by the fan-base at large and was a good QB.

Re: Realistic UFA PATS should consider

HEY BRO! WHAT UP? said:

I got some realistic free agents for you, they can sign anybody! The Pats are in one of the biggest sports markets and it's uncapped. It's not a matter of "if" the Pats can sign them, it's whether they "want" to sign them.

Click to expand...

Its also a matter of staying within future caps, because there WILL be future caps and these deals WILL count toward them.

Derrick Mason........ He would be a great addition. Especially with Welker out for a bit. I don't care how old Mason is, he is a great reciever and could help this team.